Chennai Court November 2016 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
M.S. Saravanan and Others Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelv ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.A2/5383/2015, dated 10.07.2015 and posted on 22.07.2015, and quash the same.) Common Order: M. Sathyanarayanan, J. 1. By consent, these writ petitions are taken up for final disposal as the subject matter of challenge is one and the same. 2. The facts leading to the filing of these writ petitions would read, among other things, that the petitioners herein who are the husband and wife, have jointly availed the personal loan from the second respondent on 01.11.2011 for a sum of Rs.14,35,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs and Thirty Five Thousand only) with interest at the rate of 11% per annum and agreed to pay the same in an Equated Monthly Installment of Rs.24,995/- (Rupees Twenty Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety Five only) per month in the Loan Account No.42900154. 3. According to th...
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Ganesan and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, to set aside the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Sub Court, Uthamapalayam made in MCOP No.122/2011, dated 19.12.2012 and allow the appeal with costs and render justice.) 1. It is a case of injury and the accident took place on 24.11.1996 at 11 a.m. at Byepass Road, Uthamapalayam. The injured person filed an application before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Sub Court, Uthamapalayam, seeking compensation. The Tribunal considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.4,54,000/- towards total compensation. 2. The present appeal is preferred by the Oriental Insurance Company solely on the ground that in spite of notice for production of license by the driver, who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident, neither the owner nor the driver produced the valid driving license and the statement was also recorded by the Tribunal in its finding. When the owner of the ve...
P. Singaram Vs. The Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, Chennai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's complaint No.170 of 2015 under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961.) Order M. Sathyanarayanan, J. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. The learned Standing appearing on behalf of the respondent has produced an order dated 21.09.2016 made in T.N.E.C.R.No.8 of 2016 in and by which Mr.T.R.Stanly Mullar has been removed from the rolls of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry with immediate effect. 3. At this juncture, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the said communication dated 21.09.2016 has not been put on notice to the Bar Association concerned, to which, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that necessary steps will be taken to communicate...
G. Navaneethakrishnan Vs. The Secretary to Government, Tamil Departmen ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned orders passed by the 1st respondent in G.O.Ms.No.429, Tamil Department, Religious and Information Department, dated 17.12.2008, as well as the consequential order dated 05.03.2009 passed in Na.Ka.No.5443/2008/I, by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and further direct the respondents to continue to pay the same scale of pay to the petitioner as was given.) 1. The writ petition has been filed for issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned orders passed by the 1st respondent in G.O.Ms.No.429, Tamil Development, Religious and Information Department, dated 17.12.2008, as well as the consequential order dated 05.03.2009 passed in Na.Ka.No.5443/2008/I, by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and further direct the respondents to continue to pay the same scale of pay to the petitioner...
Vijayendran Vs. State rep. by Station House Officer, Thirupapuliyur
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal revision is preferred under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., against the judgment, dated 13.5.2011 made in C.A.No.72 of 2009 by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.2),Cuddalore, confirming the judgment, dated 1.12.2009 made in C.C.No.239 of 2007 by the Judicial Magistrate No.III, Cuddalore.) 1. The revision petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.239 of 2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Cuddalore. 2. The case of the prosecution briefly runs as under:- On 25.7.2007, at about 8.45 a.m., one Krishnamoorthy was riding his bicycle on the Cuddalore-Thiruvanthipuram Main Road from East to West. At about that time, the accused came driven the Balaji Bus behind him fastly and hit behind the bicycle. The cyclist sustained grievous injuries. This accident was witnessed to by PWs-1, 5 and 6. The injured was taken to Government Hospital, Cuddalore. At the hospital, PW-12/Head Constable of Thirupapuliyur Police Station recorded statement fr...
Shankar Vs. Bhoopalan and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated 19.8.2013 made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.914 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Court of III Small Causes, Chennai.) 1. This appeal is preferred by the claimant not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (III Court of Small Causes), Chennai. 2. In the claim petition filed before the Tribunal, the claimant has stated that on 10.1.2012 at about 20.15 hours while he was walking along G.S.T.Road, Vandalur, Forest Check Post, a Tempo Travellor bearing Reg.No.TN-10-L-7857 which was proceeding from Guduvancheri to Tambaram, being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the appellant. In the accident, the appellant sustained grievous injuries and suffered permanent disability at 50%. 3. The Tribunal, on appreciating the pleadings and evidence, awarded a total sum of Rs.1,60,000/- payab...
The Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Kumbakonam Vs. Ra ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer:-Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, against the judgment and decree passed in MCOP No.261/2010, dated 12.04.2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Additional Sub Court, Kumbakonam.) The accident took place on 20.03.2009 at about 7 p.m. at Aaduthurai to Thirumangalam Road. The claimant sustained grievous injuries and filed a petition for compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kumbakonam, in MCOP No.261 of 2010 and the Tribunal after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded a sum of Rs.93,330/- as total compensation. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that it is a case of pay and recovery and the principle was not considered by the Tribunal, despite the fact that the insurance company has examined its witnesses showing that the driver who was driving the vehicle, which met with the accident, did not possess a valid driving license. 3. The learned counsel ap...
Kutty Vs. The State rep. by The Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under section 374 of Cr.P.C. to call for the records in S.C.No.207 of 2013 on the file of XVII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai and to examine the same and set aside the judgment of conviction pronounced on 29.7.2016 as well as the sentences inflicted, fine amounts imposed thereby upon the appellant and to acquit the appellant and set him at liberty.) A. Selvam, J 1. This Criminal Appeal has been directed against the convictions and sentences dated 29th day of July, 2016 passed in Sessions Case No.207 of 2013 by the XVII Additional Sessions Court, Chennai. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the first accused by name Kutty is the brother of the deceased by name Kesavan. The defacto complainant, by name Saranya is the wife of the deceased. Both the defacto complainant and deceased, at the time of the occurrence, have resided in No.21/4, Muthu Kumarasamy Street, Perambur, Chennai-11. In another portion of the house, the first accused and his mother, si...
Annadurai Vs. Rajendran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 17.07.2013 made in A.S.No.73 of 2012 by the Principal Sub-Court, Mayiladuthurai, reversing the judgment and decree dated 09.04.2011 in O.S.No.194 of 2007 by the District Munsif Court, Sirkali.) The appellant is the plaintiff. He filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.48,250/- with subsequent interest based on a promissory note dated 03.09.2004 said to have been executed by the defendant. 2. The defendant contested the suit. His specific case is that he borrowed a sum of Rs.22,000/- from the plaintiff on 03.09.1999 and repaid the same with interest in the year 2000. His further case is that at the time of such borrowal, the plaintiff obtained a promissory note which he failed to handover after such discharge. It is the further case of the defendant that again on 03.09.2001, he borrowed a sum of Rs.38,000/- from the plaintiff and executed another promissory note. According to th...
Jagadeesan Vs. Rasu and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to withdraw the O.S.No.187 of 2015 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Kuzhithalai, Karur District and transfer the same to any other Court in outside of Trichy District.) 1. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the above, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed....
- ‹ Prev
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- Next ›
- Last »